Case 6012893/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Harry Frampton v Blue Unity Synergy — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012893/2024
- Decision date
- 25 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Harry Frampton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis is a Rule 21 / Rule 22 judgment issued by Employment Judge Midgley on 25 November 2025 in the claim of Mr Harry Frampton against Blue Unity Synergy. The judgment records three findings in the claimant's favour without setting out detailed reasoning, as is typical of a default judgment issued under the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,500.00 net. It further found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay £500.00 gross in damages. Finally, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the sum of 138.75.
The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Midgley sitting alone and was sent to the parties on 16 December 2025. The document does not set out narrative findings of fact, legal tests, or reasons beyond the operative orders.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the net sum of £1,500.00 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,500 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £500.00 gross ordered. | Upheld | — | £500 |
| Holiday pay | Respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement; sum of 138.75 ordered (currency symbol not explicit in the text, assumed GBP based on context). | Upheld | — | £139 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,139
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.